Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
shuttlt said:
Falcanelli,

Are you aware of any quotes from Filomina about the state of her room? The only even slightly relevant quote I've been able to find in the few minutes I've put into looking is her saying "Amanda never cleaned the house, we had to institute a rota".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1569579/Vital-clues-in-Meredith-Kercher-murder-case.html

It would be a bit much for somebody who left her room in that kind of state to be complaining about other people, but perhaps she did.
Click to expand...


Please look at her nightstand. Please look at her table. These are not signs that the room was ransacked. These are signs of clutter.

There was no investigation done. If there was, we would have photographs of glass on the clothes. The investigators took Filomena's word for everything in regard to her room. Show me any investigation that was done on that room other than taking general photographs? At least they did that. Those photographs alone show a totally different story than the prosecution would want you to believe.
 
Hold up a minute. If Fillomina's room was left like that, and nothing was taken, then surely there is a mental leap from a broken window to a burglary. How did Amanda and Raffaele know it wasn't just a vandal who'd thrown a rock through the first floor window?
 
Fulcanelli said:
And where's the evidence for these gloves and coat? Is that why he 'left fingerprints everywhere' as you people are fond of saying? And how did he make that climb wearing gloves...gloves are not really known for their 'grip', they also fatten the fingers and makes the hands clumsy and a coat makes someone fatter...rendering it even more inexplicable that there is no glass fallen down outside.

And then, how come Rudy didn't transport and drop micro traces of glass in the large bathroom he used, or Meredith's room or Laura's room that was entered?

Also, the standard line form the FOA has always been along the lines that Rudy was simply opportunistic, having gone to see the boys below and found they were gone and then decided to break into the cottage. Your claim of thick coat and gloves changes that and essentially argues he left his apartment with the specific intention of robbing or attacking someone? Is that right? And if that's the case, why the home of four girls, two of which were students and the other two were trainee lawyers...hardly rich pickings. Were their not better places in the whole of Perugia?
Click to expand...

We cannot pinpoint every single detail of the case. I would imagine that Rudy took his coat and gloves off and then when he left he took them with him. All of this is completely irrelevant.

I want to know what proof there is that Amanda or Raffaele had anything to do with that broken window. That is the question that no one can answer.

I did see the reply that I can't prove that Rudy did it either.

Yeah, I don't need to prove that Rudy did it.

You need to prove that Amanda or Raffaele did.
 
Some might think break in, some might think vandalism. Does their observation really mean anything at all?

Did you see how cluttered Filomena's table and nightstand were? Did you see that the armoire was not emptied out? Do you really think that room was ransacked?
 
Bruce Fisher said:
Please look at her nightstand. Please look at her table. These are not signs that the room was ransacked. These are signs of clutter.
Click to expand...
I see too different levels of clutter. Some crap on the table and so forth, then the stuff on the floor. It could be that this was normal and how it was left, it could be that it wasn't. That's not something that one can tell from a photograph.

Bruce Fisher said:
There was no investigation done. If there was, we would have photographs of glass on the clothes. The investigators took Filomena's word for everything in regard to her room. Show me any investigation that was done on that room other than taking general photographs? At least they did that. Those photographs alone show a totally different story than the prosecution would want you to believe.
Click to expand...
This reminds me of the whole business of the negative controls. You claim to have enough access to photographs of the crime scene to be able to assert that, given that you don't have detailed photographs, they don't exist. Either people must accept your assurance about your level of access, or not. I have no idea about what photographs were and weren't taken. Charlie has recently revealed the police took some special photos (are they for 3D modeling or something?) or the crime scene. If Charlie hadn't mentioned it we'd never have known. Why couldn't there be other caches of photos that we don't know about?
 
Bruce Fisher said:
If you will look at the photos again you will see that it is a very small space. The rock actually doesn't travel far. It hits the shutter and falls downward. The black paper bag is caused to move forward from the motion of the rock. The crumbled portion of the stone is at the very edge of the bag. The rock made contact with the floor as the bag and the rock were still moving.
Click to expand...

That is precisely the point, the rock doesn't travel far. Which means that the rock at the time of impact had little velocity/power. How then did it damage the shutter to the extend that it has?

Further, if the window (and shutter) were closed, which they would have to be, why else throw a rock?; How do you get from the point of impact on the shutter to where the rock landed. The angle that the rock 'bounced' seems pretty strange. Especially strange for a rock that seems to have lost all forward momentum.

And then you claim that this rock still has enough momentum to push both the paper bag and the hand bag over, with yet enough power left to push the paper bag over the purse/hand bag. Can you educate me on the physics involved here? How does a stone which has lost all it's forward momentum pick up enough power to do what you claim it does? It can't be the momentum it picked while falling down from the shutter, that would at best cause the stone to fall into the bag and come to rest there.
 
It's a pity we don't have a decent demonstration of the rock throw, or the climb through the window. That combined with Filomina confirming that that was how she left the room would close off the topic of the burglery nicely.
 
The photo of the stone that shows small pieces of the stone that had broken off when the stone hit the floor is really interesting. I hadn't seen that one before.

"Would Amanda and Raffaele have really thought to throw the rock down on the floor causing an impact to make it look as if it had been thrown?" good question.
 
Last edited:
Hello Bruce, Welcome to JREF.

And thanks for clearly introducing yourself as the owner of http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/. Being up front about who you are is certainly a refreshing change over some that have promoted their site while being coy about their role at the site.

Non of the regulars in this thread have any control over the forum. The moderators do however peek in at times to keep the discussions civil.
 
I just found this quote from Filomina on the Injusticinperugia timeline:

12:34 p.m. Filomena calls Amanda. In her witness statement, Filomena says, "We spoke to each other for the third time and she told me that the window in my room was broken and that my room was in a mess. At this point I asked her to call the police and she told me that she already had." (Note: Filomena remembers this call, incorrectly, as coming in at 12:45).
Click to expand...
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/timeline-2.html

I don't see that this wholely makes sense if either Filomina's room was normally in a mess, or Filomina knew she had left her room in a mess. I suppose it's possible that the mess was out of character, hence Amanda mentioning it. Not definitive, but I don't recall any better quotes from Filomina on the issue.
 
Oliebol said:
The photo of the stone that shows small pieces of the stone that had broken off when the stone hit the floor is really interesting. I hadn't seen that one before.

"Would Amanda and Raffaele have really thought to throw the rock down on the floor causing an impact to make it look as if it had been thrown?" good question.
Click to expand...

Bad physics, if you believe that the rock was thrown from outside below the window.

ETA: the photo you referring too, is actually proof that the rock was dropped vertically in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
shuttlt said:
It's a pity we don't have a decent demonstration of the rock throw, or the climb through the window. That combined with Filomina confirming that that was how she left the room would close off the topic of the burglery nicely.
Click to expand...
.
The fact that a well-built Sollecito team lawyer could go no further than touching the bottom sill of the window closed off the burglary for me.

It would be all but impossible for a non-expert climber to haul himself up to the window, with only the shard-infested broken pane to grab onto.

Where are the shards on the ground below? ... in addition to being an expert climber, Rudy - it would seem according to FOA - was very dainty.

I see that Bruce is repeating the unsubstantiated FOA accusations that Rudy had a record as a break-in-through-the-window-thief. If so, why are those references not in the trial record?
 
Last edited:
odeed said:
Bad physics, if you believe that the rock was thrown from outside below the window.

ETA: the photo you referring too, is actually proof that the rock was dropped vertically in my opinion.
Click to expand...
.
FOA made a bad choice when they decided to use the same experts as those who testified to the existence of the "magic bullet" which killed JF Kennedy and changed trajectory about 6 times.

 
Thanks for the pictures Bruce. But judging from them I have a hard time picturing the postulated "Rudy break-in". I think it's very difficult, maybe even impossible, to open the latch on the window while crouching on the ledge. At least with the remaining glass in the position it is in. If you are on the ledge you basically have to crouch down and then move your arm through the opening and then turn your forearm back up to reach the latch. And that while standing in the remaining glass on that side.
And you have to crouch on that ledge to open the window from the outside, because otherwise you'd either need abnormally long arms with a joint more than humans tend to possess or a long tool like a stick with a loop at the end.
And regarding Rudy wearing gloves: When did he discard those? Because afaik he was identified by fingerprints. Which means he either didn't wear any gloves or removed the. Where in the lone predator scenario does Rudy have time and reasons to remove them?
 
odeed said:
Bad physics, if you believe that the rock was thrown from outside below the window.

ETA: the photo you referring too, is actually proof that the rock was dropped vertically in my opinion.
Click to expand...

they really are some master stagers. they even thought about dropping the rock instead of just placing it somewhere in the room. not bad!
 
Oliebol said:
they really are some master stagers. they even thought about dropping the rock instead of just placing it somewhere in the room. not bad!
Click to expand...

And why not if they had it in the hand, and the author of article you refer to says that rock would have to be thrown down but does not know anything about physics.
 
well, looking at the photos it's obvious that filomena was indeed very messy. but leaving so many clothes on the floor??? i dont know...and she wasn't even a student.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom